Ever since the advent of computers, and computing, software for computers has been written to be operated upon a single machine. As indicated in FIG. 1, that single prior art machine 1 is made up from a central processing unit, or CPU, 2 which is connected to a memory 3 via a bus 4. Also connected to the bus 4 are various other functional units of the single machine 1 such as a screen 5, keyboard 6 and mouse 7.
A fundamental limit to the performance of the machine 1 is that the data to be manipulated by the CPU 2, and the results of those manipulations, must be moved by the bus 4. The bus 4 suffers from a number of problems including so called bus “queues” formed by units wishing to gain an access to the bus, contention problems, and the like. These problems can, to some extent, be alleviated by various stratagems including cache memory, however, such stratagems invariably increase the administrative overhead of the machine 1.
Naturally, over the years various attempts have been made to increase machine performance. One approach is to use symmetric multiple processors. This prior art approach has been used in so called “super” computers and is schematically indicated in FIG. 2. Here a plurality of CPU's 12 are connected to global memory 13. Again, a bottleneck arises in the communications between the CPU's 12 and the memory 13. This process has been termed “Single System Image”. There is only one application and one whole copy of the memory for the application which is distributed over the global memory. The single application can read from and write to, (ie share) any memory location completely transparently.
Where there are a number of such machines interconnected via a network, this is achieved by taking the single application written for a single machine and partitioning the required memory resources into parts. These parts are then distributed across a number of computers to form the global memory 13 accessible by all CPU's 12. This procedure relies on masking, or hiding, the memory partition from the single running application program. The performance degrades when one CPU on one machine must access (via a network) a memory location physically located in a different machine.
Although super computers have been technically successful in achieving high computational rates, they are not commercially successful in that their inherent complexity makes them extremely expensive not only to manufacture but to administer. In particular, the single system image concept has never been able to scale over “commodity” (or mass produced) computers and networks. In particular, the Single System Image concept has only found practical application on very fast (and hence very expensive) computers interconnected by very fast (and similarly expensive) networks.
A further possibility of increased computer power through the use of a plural number of machines arises from the prior art concept of distributed computing which is schematically illustrated in FIG. 3. In this known arrangement, a single application program (Ap) is partitioned by its author (or another programmer who has become familiar with the application program) into various discrete tasks so as to run upon, say, three machines in which case n in FIG. 3 is the integer 3. The intention here is that each of the machines M1 . . . M3 runs a different third of the entire application and the intention is that the loads applied to the various machines be approximately equal. The machines communicate via a network 14 which can be provided in various forms such as a communications link, the internet, intranets, local area networks, and the like. Typically the speed of operation of such networks 14 is an order of magnitude slower than the speed of operation of the bus 4 in each of the individual machines M1, M2, etc.
Distributed computing suffers from a number of disadvantages. Firstly, it is a difficult job to partition the application and this must be done manually. Secondly, communicating data, partial results, results and the like over the network 14 is an administrative overhead. Thirdly, the need for partitioning makes it extremely difficult to scale upwardly by utilising more machines since the application having been partitioned into, say three, does not run well upon four machines. Fourthly, in the event that one of the machines should become disabled, the overall performance of the entire system is substantially degraded.
A further prior art arrangement is known as network computing via “clusters” as is schematically illustrated in FIG. 4. In this approach, the entire application is loaded onto each of the machines M1, M2 . . . Mn. Each machine communicates with a common database but does not communicate directly with the other machines. Although each machine runs the same application, each machine is doing a different “job” and uses only its own memory. This is somewhat analogous to a number of windows each of which sell train tickets to the public. This approach does operate, is scalable and mainly suffers from the disadvantage that it is difficult to administer the network.
In computer languages such as JAVA and MICROSOFT.NET there are two major types of constructs with which programmers deal. In the JAVA language these are known as objects and classes. Every time an object is created there is an initialization routine run known as “<init>”. Similarly, every time a class is loaded there is an initialization routine known as “<clinit>”. Other languages use different terms but utilize a similar concept.
However, there is no equivalent “clean up” or deletion routine to delete an object or class once it is no longer required. Instead, this “clean up” happens unobtrusively in a background mode.
Furthermore, in any computer environment it is necessary to acquire and release a lock to enable the use of such assets, resources or structures to avoid different parts of the application program attempting to use the same resource at the one time. In the JAVA environment this is known as synchronization. This is achieved in JAVA by the “monitor enter” and “monitor exit” instructions or routines. Other languages use different terms but utilize a similar concept.
The present invention discloses a computing environment in which an application program operates simultaneously on a plurality of computers. In such an environment it is necessary to ensure that the abovementioned initialization, clean up and synchronization procedures operate in a consistent and coordinated fashion across all the machines. It is this goal of coordination that is the genesis of the present invention.
In accordance with a first aspect of the present invention there is disclosed a multiple computer system having at least one application program running simultaneously on a plurality of computers interconnected by a communications network, wherein a like plurality of substantially identical objects are created, each in the corresponding computer and each having a substantially identical name, wherein the initial contents of each of said identically named objects is substantially the same, wherein all said identical objects are collectively deleted when each one of said plurality of computers no longer needs to refer to their corresponding object, and wherein said system includes a lock means applicable to all said computers wherein any computer wishing to utilize a named object therein acquires an authorizing lock from said lock means which permits said utilization and which prevents all the other computers from utilizing their corresponding named object until said authorizing lock is relinquished.
In accordance with a second aspect of the present invention there is disclosed a method of running at least one application program on a plurality of computers simultaneously, said computers being interconnected by means of a communications network, said method comprising the steps of:
(i) creating a like plurality of substantially identical objects each in the corresponding computer and each having a substantially identical name,
(ii) creating the initial contents of each of said identically named objects substantially the same,
(iii) deleting all said identical objects collectively when all of said plurality of computers no longer need to refer to their corresponding object, and
(iv) requiring any of said computers wishing to utilize a named object therein to acquire an authorizing lock which permits said utilization and which prevents all the other computers from utilizing their corresponding named object until said authorizing lock is relinquished.
In accordance with a third aspect of the present invention there is disclosed a computer program product comprising a set of program instructions stored in a storage medium and operable to permit a plurality of computers to carry out the abovementioned method.
The specification includes Annexures A, B, C and D which provide actual program fragments which implement various aspects of the described embodiments. Annexure A relates to fields and Annexure B relates to initialization. Annexure C relates to finalization. Annexure D relates to synchronization.